Fish and Game Commission to consider ban on American R.

[Darian]

After reviewing the letters/responses, I gotta say that the authors of this proposal/request still don't get it.... Nothing new in those letters/responses. At the last of the final NCCFFF response are two statements (1),

As to the “elitist” comment––my take on that (having lived seven years of my adult life in Europe) is that term originated there. In Europe, most waters are owned, and it was (and still is to some extent) the “landed gentry” that owned the bulk of the streams. If the owner chooses to not allow fishing outside family and friends, there is a pay-to-play charge. Most fly fishing clubs lease streams and exchange fishing rights on those streams with a handful of other clubs. Guards are often hired to patrol the streams to keep the “unwashed” out. and (2),

"In the American River situation, we (supposed) “elitists” are asking to exclude ourselves from the fishing. That hardly makes the title fit, one would think!" and (2),

The first statement has little to do with reality/perception of elitism as it applies to fly fisherman in this country. The second, smug statement "....we (supposed) 'elitists'.... excluding ourselves...." actually illustrates how complete the misunderstanding was and remains. The request, if adopted, would exclude a bunch more people than just NCCFFF fly fishers. I'd be willing to bet that most NCCFFF members weren't anymore aware of the request than any of the rest of us.

The NCCFFF letters/responses reflect a failure to understand that the authors are not and should not be the sole authority for requests of this nature regardless of their motives. As once was said, "....methinks he doth protest too much".

Enough of this. It's all over but the shouting....

[mike N]

I don't think I'll be joining the NCCFFF anytime soon. I think that is because I think for myself and actually prefer to do so.

It is uncomfortable to know that others feel they can think for us.

MN

[Bob Laskodi]

Well said Darian, I agree 100% with your assessment. Especially this one: "The NCCFFF letters/responses reflect a failure to understand that the authors are not and should not be the sole authority for requests of this nature regardless of their motives". Me thinks the NCCFFF has shot themselves in the you-know-what with this, and has used up what little "good will" they had left with other angling organizations. A crying shame because the fish need all the friends they can get these days, regardless of whether they fling flies, bait, or lures.

[Mike McKenzie]

I was asked by the NCCFFF to post this, so here it is...

NCCFFF action on the American River

The NCCFFF has been asked to explain why we did what we did in requesting a temporary fishing closure on the American River.

We have long been involved with the American River. In 2006, The NCC worked with Friends of the River, CSPA, local fly clubs and others in getting Sacramento Municipal Utility District to negotiate more fish friendly operations on their upper AR FERC relicensing. Also in 2006, we recruited bucket-brigade labor from three Sacramento area affiliated clubs to open a steelhead stranding area near the Sunrise Bridge.

The NCC has participated in the American River Operating Group (AROG) since 2005. The AROG is an advisory group to the US Bureau of Reclamation in Sacramento, and is comprised of federal (the Bureau, NOOA, US fish and Wildlife Service), and state (DFG, DWR) agencies, plus NGOs (Sac State, Save the American River Assn., and others). Its function is to advise the Bureau on operating Folsom Dam releases in a fish-supportive manner.

Geography put the American in the worst place politically. Being closest, the river serves as the quick reaction resource for Delta problems. AR water gets to the Delta in a day while water from Shasta, for example, takes five days. So when there is a problem, American river water becomes the quick solution. This year, coming off a dry winter, the Bureau kept summer releases high, drawing storage behind Folsom Dam down. There are huge competing demands on Folsom water for salinity control, agriculture and municipal water supply to name a few.

The primary fish consideration in Folsom operations has been maintaining cool river water temperatures. In 2007, as the pool in Folsom Lake dried up, the Bureau’s ability to provide cold water to the river declined. By luck, ambient temperatures from August on into the fall were below average, enabling river temperatures to be kept within goals. However, by late fall, the pool was drastically low, and long range weather forecasts held little hope of rain.

At a 1 Dec meeting, the NCC board voted a standby action to ask for an emergency closure for protection of in-stream steelhead spawning if river flows dropped below 1100 cfs. A lot of steelhead snagging had been reported the previous winter when flows were much higher than this year. And little was seen in enforcement actions. At that time, very few returning steelhead had been seen in the river

In the fall, the American is closed to fishing in the upper reaches where the bulk of the in-river salmon spawning, takes place. But it reopens on Jan 1, and the majority of steelhead spawning takes place in January through March. So the standby action would ask for a fishing closure if flows dropped below 1100 cfs during February and March. At the December AROG meeting, the weather forecast showed a potent winter storm for the holidays. That occurred, leaving several feet of snow in the Sierra, but little water inflow into Folsom. Inflows did rise a bit, raising hopes the closure request would not be needed. But when the AROG next met on 8 January, the long-range rainfall was grim, and the Bureau announced they planned to drop flows to below 1100, then talked of going down as low as the 900s! At that time, the AROG was briefed on the NCC standby action.

A few days later, the flows did drop into the 1000s, the lowest in many years. So the standby action was activated. There is a Fish and Game Commission meeting in San Diego on 7 Feb. For an item to be on their agenda, it had to be at the Commission 15 days before the meeting, a very tight timeline. The DFG director was notified of the action as was the chief warden, and a subsequent discussion was held with the Region II director. The three local fly clubs were notified. The SARA board was briefed on 15 January.

To insure the commission clearly understood what was being asked for, a follow-up letter was sent. It emphasized that a temporary closure, only when river flows were below 1100 cfs, and only during the months of February and March 2008. But that letter arrived too late to be included in the agenized item.

In summary, there was no attempt to hide the NCC action. At least fifty people were made aware of it through the AROG and other briefings. And these were the representatives of the organizations believed to be involved in the American River.

The goal of this was not to deny fishing in any legal form. The goal is to protect steelhead spawning in the American River, for now and so that there is an AR steelhead fishery in the future. The steelhead are federally listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act.

The real solution involves more water being released to the river and more enforcement. It is hoped that the NCC action will shine a bright light on the problems of insufficient releases to the river and the lack of wardens.

We are fully open to constructive ideas and help from anyone.

O.K. There you have the NCCFFF official explanation of the what and why...

I've already commented on this in a previous post and nothing has been said since that makes me want to change my position. That is, if the BurRec. had implemented the flow and temperature standards they agreed to back in 2004 we would not be having this discussion. Instead they have resisted doing the right thing for our fisheries and now, due to the Wanger delta smelt decision they have another excuse not to implement the agreement.

Mike

[Mike McKenzie]

"SAN FRANCISCO --

The number of chinook salmon returning to California's Central Valley reached a near-record low last year, pointing to an "unprecedented collapse" that could lead to severe restrictions on West Coast salmon fishing this year, according to federal fishery regulators.

The sharp drop in chinook or "king" salmon returning from the Pacific Ocean to spawn in the Sacramento River and its tributaries this past fall is part of broader decline in wild salmon runs in rivers across the West.

Regulators are still trying to understand the reasons for the shrinking number of spawners; some scientists believe it's related to changes in the ocean linked to global warming."

http://www.kcra.com/news/15166060/detail.html

Yeah! sure.... Now they have another "excuse", global warming disrupting the ocean environment.
Never mind that salmon smolts can't survive long enough to get to the ocean due to the lack of proper water management, especially here in the central valley where they are either entrained in the export system (because the water contractors refuse to pay for modern state of the art fish screens) or starve to death in a dead zone called the Sacramento San Joaquin Delta..... When are we going to put a stop to all this??

End of Rant!!
Mike

[Darian]

Thanks for posting the article about the Salmon population crash Mike. Very disturbing but seems it should've been predictable.... I guess we'll all be warm and salt water fly fisherman in the future....

One of the approaches we might use to protect fish at the pumps is to urge water regulators to install the "state of the art" screens that you mentioned and then bill Westlands, etc., for the cost. That undoubtedly would end up in the courts where there is the potential to fix that cost and hold them responsible for payment of the judgment.... At the least we might get a settlement out of 'em. Just dreamin'....

[Mike McKenzie]

The Water Contractors are going after Striped Bass...next comes Largemouth, Smallmouth, Shad, Bluegills and all the rest of our introduced fisheries....

PRESS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Jann Taber 916/391-8811
January 29, 2008

Coalition for a Sustainable Delta Files Lawsuit Regarding
Striped Bass Sports Fishing Regulations
State Department of Fish and Game Sued Over Clear Violations of Federal Endangered Species Act

SACRAMENTO, CA – The Coalition for a Sustainable Delta today filed a lawsuit in federal district court against the California Fish and Game Commission (CFGC) and the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) for violating the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA). State sport fishing regulations protect the non-native striped bass, a known predator of several native endangered and threatened species including the Delta smelt. The state agencies were put on notice in late October of the Coalition’s concerns with ongoing striped bass programs, however, the agencies failed to take corrective actions.

“We are taking legal action today to correct clear and continuing violations by state fish and game regulators that are harming the Sacramento-San Joaquin Bay Delta. Prompt action is necessary to prevent further decline of critical fisheries and to protect the state’s environmental and economic health,” said Michael Boccadoro, spokesperson for the Coalition for a Sustainable Delta. “Fostering the destruction of thousands of native threatened and endangered species is a clear violation of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and must be stopped. Allowing this destruction to continue when the populations of several of these species – including the Delta Smelt – are crashing is outrageous.”

The non-native striped bass is widely recognized as a voracious predator that feasts on some of the most endangered native species in the Delta. The striped bass was introduced into the Delta region in the late 19th Century. Its population has fluctuated from a low of approximately 600,000 to a high of three million.

In the early 1980’s the sports fishing industry successfully lobbied the State of California to enact legislation that created a striped bass fishing stamp. CDFG used the money raised by the stamp to support the striped bass population in the Delta. The hatchery program run by the state added more than 5.5 million striped bass to the Delta over the life of the restocking program.

The funds were also used to develop the Striped Bass Restoration and Management Plan. Consistent with the plan and CFGC policy, the Department continues to enforce “size” and “bag” limits for striped bass fishing in the state. Fishermen are limited to two fish and each fish must be at least 18 inches in length. The “bag” and “size” limits are designed to further the commission’s official striped bass restoration goal of three million fish. These regulations, however, also effectively foster the demise of tens of thousands of native Delta fish that are protected under the ESA.

Striped bass prey upon four listed fish species: the Sacramento River winter-run Chinook salmon; the Central Valley spring-run Chinook salmon; the Central Valley steelhead; and the Delta smelt. While the salmon and the steelhead spend most of their lives in the ocean, they return to the Delta to spawn.

Unfortunately, the Delta smelt and other endangered fish provide a readily available food supply for the striped bass. According to CDFG’s own estimates, each year up to six percent of the population of these endangered species are consumed by the striped bass – a fish that is not supposed to be in the Delta in the first place. Two federal agencies also readily acknowledged the problem. In its 2007 Recovery Outline, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) considers the striped bass as a threat to the salmon and steelhead. And the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) is on record stating, “It is quite possible that at low population levels interactions with [striped bass] could prevent recovery (of the Delta Smelt).”

Recently, a federal district court in Fresno ruled that water deliveries to a majority of the state’s residents, farms and businesses must be substantially reduced to protect the delta smelt. The California Department of Water Resources has estimated the court ruling will reduce water deliveries by 22-30 percent in average water years. A host of factors however continue to impact the estuary and contribute to the fishery decline. These “stressors” include toxic urban and agricultural run-off, thousands of unscreened in-delta diversions, increased discharge of municipal wastewater, industrial discharges and increased competition and predation from invasive species.

“Scientific research demonstrates that the health of the delta is at risk from a multitude of factors, including non-native striped bass preying on threatened and endangered native fish,” said Boccadoro. “Unless and until all of these factors are addressed, long-term sustainability of the estuary cannot and will not be achieved. State and federal regulators and the courts cannot turn a blind-eye to these other factors while continuing to allow the water supplies for 25 million residents of the state to be sharply reduced.”

The Coalition for a Sustainable Delta is working to address all of the stressors that impact the estuary through education, cooperation, research and, where necessary legal action. Mirant Delta LLC was put on similar notice for clear violations of the ESA in September, 2007 in connection with their operation of the Pittsburg and Contra Costa Power Plants. The Coalition has also launched a far-reaching research effort to better understand critical impacts on the estuary and has developed an educational video entitled Understanding and Solving the Delta Crisis.

Following is the cover of CDFG’s Striped Bass Restoration and Management Plan, which depicts a striped bass preying on a school of Delta smelt.


# # #

For a copy of the lawsuit and for more information, visit www.sustainabledelta.com
Back to top

[Darian]

And the hits just keep on coming..... Took a look at the materials on the link you (Mike) provided and tried to locate the so called Striped Bass Recovery Plan on DFG's website but couldn't find it. Am I missing something

Unfortunately, this looks like the water distributors have watched, learned and are turning our tactics of using an endangered species to meet our desired outcome thru the courts. I guess everything is a "two edged sword". Time to get out the thinking cap and see what can be done to help defeat this litigation.

Hmmm,..... Wasn't there a post somewhere on this BB about the Pres., signing a protective order for Stripers

[HC]

Well we got their attention now and they are focused right on our weak link, the Striper. Call it a surge if like, but this is just the start of new and dirtier tactics to attack us through our objects, the fish. But then its all temporary for once they have the Sac R. piped around the Delta right straight to LA they will forget all about the our little fish, if any remain. Its comming you know, for they have aquired a taste for fresh water, ours... And here we are bickering with each other once more over which puny sport fishing group speaks for us. The opposition is united in their cause and is funding a plan of attack by taking their corrupt message to the misinforned masses via paid advertisers, known formerly as new papers. Print space for money and so on. I am not convinced that the masses would side with fishing groups anyway, if the arguements go on in present form. Water diversion should be our over arching focus. Lets not be distracted by the tactic of our opponents. HC

[Mike McKenzie]

Darian,

A quick response as there ain't enough hours in the day for me right now....
The recovery plan is now Fish and Game Commission "Policy" with, the as of now unstated caveat, that there is no longer allowed any artificial population enhancement ie; Hatchery augmentation or any pen rearing of salvaged fish...Long story about that, I'll have to tell later....
Anyway find it here:

http://www.fgc.ca.gov/html/p2fish.html#STRIPED


As far as what protection for striped bass that Bush signed goes..It only applies to striped bass in federal waters on the east coast. In other words it wasn't really much help to stripers....
I thought I posted that clarification on my original post, I guess I didn't.....

Mike